Grandpa Waiters wrote:I have a book called "Loose Balls". It's a book about the ABA comprised of tidbits and interviews conducted with players, coaches, executives and announcers like Bob Costas who were a part of the league. The general consensus was that the top tier stars (Erving, Moses, Thompson, Gervin, Gilmore, Barry etc) were NBA caliber but that the second tier players were not. Also, it was a run and gun league full of gimmicks used to inflate stats (3 pointers) and attract fans (red, white and blue ball, dunk contest etc). Most of the players who only played in the ABA claimed it was on par with the NBA but the players who transitioned made it clear that the NBA was a superior league all the way around including competition. Their words, not mine. Anyway, it's a good read, check it out if the ABA interests you.
I've read Loose Balls a few times (although its been 10 years or so since the last time) and I've had the opportunity to talk with at least a dozen guys who are responsible for some of the narrative/interviews in that book. If what you got out of the book is that the ABA guys thought the NBA was superior all the way around, then you really need to re-read the book, making sure to distinguish between ABA interviews and NBA interviews on the league. I can tell you that no ABA player thought they were playing in an inferior league from a talent standpoint. Cliff notes version: league started inferior, within 3 years they had engineered backloaded contracts to siphon off NBA talent and rookies. They took vet refs to improve the court product. They lacked TV dollars and deep pockets. They tried to force a merger, blocked by the Robertson legislation. In exhibition games, the ABA held the all time edge 79-76. Over the last 3 years of intraleague play, the ABA held the edge 62-34. There were offers from multiple ABA title winners to play the NBA champs in a winner take all series. The NBA never bit. Arguably, the NBA could reason they had nothing to gain from an ABA-NBA series, but if they were that confident in their superiority, they could have buried the ABA by decisively defeating them in a championship series. They didn't. As acrossthecourt noted, the combined league in 77 was stronger than either the ABA or NBA in 76, but NBA players suffered a greater decline in terms of WS/48 and other pace adjusted metrics. Back in 2003 or 2004, I did work looking at guys who jumped leagues and noted parity was roughly achieved around 1972. Going into 75-76 the league began to crack due to lack of funds (and player losses), but contraction kept things at parity. 5 of 10 starters in the 77 finals were ABA guys. FWIW-the league wasn't "swept under a rug". They were forced to capitulate due to financial concerns, losing needed draft picks and TV dollars in the process. The truth is, the NBA of the 80s (and today) resembles the ABA game of the 70s much more than it does the NBA game of the same era.
If you want to understand why Erving didn't rebound at the same level in the NBA, the reasons are fairly obvious. First, when Erving entered the league, he played PF and SF. He was closer to the basket and therefore got more boards. so when he transitioned to more of a pure SF role (and later a SF/SG hybrid wing role), his rebound rate naturally fell from 16.4 to 13.6. Note: look at rates, not averages, because there were more misses in the ABA as well. Secondly, when he left the Nets, he went to a team with better rebounders (many of them ex-ABA guys from other teams). Third, if you want to apply this standard to Erving, you should also apply it to NBA players of the same era. Kareem never duplicated the production and impact he had from ages 22-24 in the 1970/71 - 1972/73 seasons. This is more curious because his role didn't change as much as Ervings, he didn't switch leagues, and centers typically take longer to fully mature than athletic, penetrating wing players. Just about every high profile player who entered the league around the time of Kareem had their most productive seasons pre-merger and abnormally early in their careers: Unseld, McAdoo, Cowens, Tiny, Dandridge, etc, etc etc. Lanier was one of the few to buck the trend.
It wasn't that that ABA was inferior to the NBA. It was that the NBA, post 1976, was stronger than both the ABA and NBA of the prior era.
Reading him drop knowledge and reasoning in each post is kind of like watching Jordan drop 40+ over and over. Hmmm...
, can finish through contact and get and-1's easily, but another thing we have in common is laziness and very bad defense, but:
